The Living God

What you'll learn

Define the main attributes of God, sorting them into incommunicable and communicable, and show each from Scripture.
Explain the Creator-creature distinction, aseity, simplicity, immutability and impassibility without the common misunderstandings.
Articulate the Reformed doctrine of God's decree and providence, including compatibilism and why God is not the author of sin.

The doctrine in one sentence

God is the one living and true God: self-existent, infinite, eternal and unchangeable in all that he is, perfect in holiness, love, justice and goodness, the Creator who depends on nothing, and the sovereign Lord who has ordained and providentially governs whatsoever comes to pass, without being the author of sin.

The Westminster Shorter Catechism compresses this into one of the finest sentences in the English language: 'God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal, and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness, and truth' (Q4). Notice the structure. Three words ('infinite, eternal, unchangeable') describe the way God has every one of the seven perfections that follow. His wisdom is infinite, eternal and unchangeable; so is his justice; so is his goodness. God is not a big creature with more of what we have. He is a different kind of being altogether.

J. I. Packer argued that knowing God is the whole point of the Christian life. For an apologist it is also strategic: almost every rival worldview in this course fails first by having too small a God.

In the Shorter Catechism's answer to Q4, what job do the words 'infinite, eternal, and unchangeable' do, and why does that matter?Show answer

They describe the way God possesses every one of the seven perfections that follow: his wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth are each infinite, eternal and unchangeable. This shows that God is not a big creature with more of what we have, but a different kind of being altogether. For apologetics this matters because almost every rival worldview fails first by having too small a God.

describe how God has every perfection
God is not a bigger creature
different kind of being
rival views have too small a God

The Creator-creature distinction and aseity

The first line of the Bible draws the most important line in reality: 'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth' (Gen 1:1). There are two categories of being: God, who is uncreated, and everything else, which he made out of nothing. This is the Creator-creature distinction. God is not the biggest thing inside the universe; the universe exists inside his will (Rom 11:36, 'from him and through him and to him are all things').

From this follows aseity (Latin a se, 'from himself'): God has life in himself and depends on nothing outside himself. When Moses asked his name, God said 'I AM WHO I AM' (Ex 3:14), a name that points to underived, self-existent being. Jesus says 'the Father has life in himself' and has granted the Son 'to have life in himself' (John 5:26). Paul told the Athenian philosophers that God is not 'served by human hands, as though he needed anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything' (Acts 17:25).

Aseity has huge consequences. God did not create because he was lonely or lacking; he created freely, out of the overflow of his own fullness. He does not need our worship, which makes worship a gift and not a transaction. And it answers the child's question 'Who made God?': nothing made God, because God is not the kind of thing that is made. He is the uncaused ground of everything that is caused, a point you will use in the classical arguments of the Foundations of Defence module.

Explain the Creator-creature distinction in your own words, using Genesis 1:1 and Romans 11:36.Show answer

Genesis 1:1 draws the most important line in reality: there is God, who is uncreated, and everything else, which he made out of nothing. God is not the biggest thing inside the universe; rather, the universe exists inside his will, since 'from him and through him and to him are all things' (Rom 11:36).

two categories: uncreated God and creation
created out of nothing
God not the biggest thing in the universe

How does God's aseity answer the question 'Who made God?', and what does it mean for why God created and why we worship?Show answer

Aseity means God has life in himself and depends on nothing outside himself (Ex 3:14; John 5:26; Acts 17:25). So nothing made God, because God is not the kind of thing that is made; he is the uncaused ground of everything caused. It also means he did not create out of loneliness or lack but freely, from the overflow of his fullness, and that worship is a gift rather than a transaction because he does not need it.

God depends on nothing
uncaused ground of all caused things
created freely, not from need
worship a gift, not a transaction

Incommunicable attributes: what God is that we are not

Reformed theologians divide God's perfections into incommunicable attributes (those with no real likeness in creatures) and communicable ones (those that have a finite echo in us as image bearers). The division is a teaching aid, not a split in God: every attribute is true of all of God.

Simplicity. God is not made of parts. He is not one-third love, one-third justice and one-third power. Each attribute is God himself viewed from a different angle. This is why God's love is always holy and his justice always good: they are not rival components. WCF 2.1 describes God as 'without body, parts, or passions'. Simplicity protects God's aseity, since anything made of parts depends on its parts.

Immutability. God does not change in his being, character, purposes or promises. 'For I the LORD do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed' (Mal 3:6). With him there is 'no variation or shadow due to change' (Jas 1:17). Note Malachi's pastoral point: because God does not change, sinners are not destroyed. His covenant faithfulness is as fixed as his being.

Impassibility. God is not subject to passions: he does not suffer involuntary emotional changes inflicted on him from outside, nor is he overwhelmed, manipulated or diminished by creatures. This does not mean God is cold or unfeeling. It means his love, joy and wrath are not mood swings but the settled, perfect, active dispositions of his being. When Scripture says God 'regretted' (Gen 6:6), it uses anthropopathic language (describing God in human emotional terms) to show how he relates to us in time, while elsewhere insisting 'God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind' (Num 23:19). The Son truly suffered, but in his human nature (see Lesson 4).

Eternity. God has no beginning, end or succession of moments: 'from everlasting to everlasting you are God' (Ps 90:2). He made time and is not trapped in it, yet he acts in it.

Omnipresence (immensity). God is not spread thinly through space; he is wholly present everywhere, because space itself cannot contain him (1 Kgs 8:27; Ps 139:7-10; Jer 23:24).

What is divine simplicity, and how does it explain why God's love is always holy and his justice always good?Show answer

Simplicity means God is not made of parts; he is not one-third love, one-third justice and one-third power. Each attribute is God himself viewed from a different angle, so his attributes are not rival components that could pull against each other. That is why his love is always holy and his justice always good, and simplicity also protects aseity, since anything made of parts depends on its parts.

God not composed of parts
each attribute is God himself
attributes not rivals
protects aseity

How would you explain to someone that God's impassibility does not mean he is cold, and how should we read texts like Genesis 6:6?Show answer

Impassibility means God does not suffer involuntary emotional changes inflicted from outside, nor is he overwhelmed or manipulated by creatures. It does not mean he is unfeeling: his love, joy and wrath are settled, perfect, active dispositions rather than mood swings. When Genesis 6:6 says God 'regretted', it uses anthropopathic language to show how he relates to us in time, while Numbers 23:19 insists he does not change his mind like a man.

no involuntary changes from outside
not cold: settled, perfect dispositions
anthropopathic language
Num 23:19

Communicable attributes: what God is that we reflect

These perfections have a finite echo in us: we know, act, love and judge, though never infinitely. Omniscience. God knows all things, actual and possible, perfectly and at once (Ps 139:1-6; Heb 4:13). He knows the future not by guessing but because he has decreed it: 'declaring the end from the beginning' (Isa 46:10). Omnipotence. God can do all that he wills, and nothing is too hard for him (Gen 18:14; Jer 32:17). This does not mean he can do contradictions or act against his nature: he 'cannot deny himself' (2 Tim 2:13), which is a mark of perfection, not weakness.

Holiness. God is utterly set apart: transcendent above creation and morally pure. The seraphim cry 'Holy, holy, holy' (Isa 6:3), the only attribute raised to the third degree in Scripture. Isaiah's response, 'Woe is me!', shows that holiness is the backdrop against which sin and grace make sense. Goodness. God is the standard of good and the source of every good gift (Ps 119:68; Jas 1:17). He does not conform to an external standard of goodness; his nature is the standard, which is your answer to the Euthyphro dilemma (the old puzzle: is something good because God commands it, or does God command it because it is good?). Neither: God commands what is good because he himself is good.

Love. 'God is love' (1 John 4:8). His love is not needy; within the Trinity, the Father has loved the Son 'before the foundation of the world' (John 17:24), so love is eternal in God before there were any creatures. Toward sinners, love takes the form of grace (unmerited favour) and mercy (pity on the miserable). Justice and wrath. God is righteous: he always does what is right and must punish sin (Ex 34:7; Rom 2:5-6). His wrath is not a temper tantrum but the settled opposition of holiness to evil (Rom 1:18). A God who did not hate evil would not be good.

Exodus 34:6-7 holds these together in God's self-description: 'merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love', yet 'who will by no means clear the guilty.' How can both be true? The question is left hanging in the Old Testament and answered at the cross (Rom 3:26).

If God is omnipotent, why can't he lie or deny himself? And how does God's goodness answer the Euthyphro dilemma?Show answer

Omnipotence means God can do all that he wills, but not contradictions or acts against his own nature; that he 'cannot deny himself' (2 Tim 2:13) is a mark of perfection, not weakness. On goodness, God does not conform to an external standard of good, nor is good arbitrary; his own nature is the standard and the source of every good gift (Ps 119:68; Jas 1:17).

omnipotence: all he wills
not contradictions or against his nature
God's nature is the standard of good

How does Exodus 34:6-7 hold God's love and justice together, and where is the tension finally resolved?Show answer

God describes himself as 'merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love', yet as one 'who will by no means clear the guilty'. His love toward sinners takes the form of grace and mercy, while his justice means he must punish sin. The Old Testament leaves the question of how both can be true hanging, and it is answered at the cross, where God is both just and the justifier (Rom 3:26).

merciful yet will not clear the guilty
love as grace and mercy
justice must punish sin
resolved at the cross (Rom 3:26)

The decree: God has ordained whatsoever comes to pass

God does not merely know the future; he has planned it. The decree of God is his eternal plan covering everything that happens. Paul says God 'works all things according to the counsel of his will' (Eph 1:11). Isaiah has God say, 'My counsel shall stand, and I will accomplish all my purpose' (Isa 46:10). Even the casting of lots is decided by the LORD (Prov 16:33), and not a sparrow falls apart from the Father (Matt 10:29).

The Shorter Catechism defines it: 'The decrees of God are, his eternal purpose, according to the counsel of his will, whereby, for his own glory, he hath foreordained whatsoever comes to pass' (Q7). God carries out this decree in two ways: creation and providence. Providence is God's continuing work of preserving and governing all creatures and all their actions (WSC Q11; Heb 1:3; Col 1:17). Nothing is random to God, and nothing is outside his care.

Here Reformed believers and many other evangelicals differ: Arminian brothers usually hold that God's decree to save individuals rests on his foreknowledge of their free choices, while Reformed theology holds that God's foreknowledge rests on his decree. Both affirm God's sovereignty and human responsibility; they disagree on how they relate. This in-house debate continues in Lesson 7.

What is the difference between God's decree and his providence?Show answer

The decree is God's eternal plan, according to the counsel of his will, by which he has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass for his glory (WSC Q7; Eph 1:11). Providence is one of the ways he carries out that decree: his continuing work of preserving and governing all creatures and all their actions (WSC Q11; Heb 1:3). The decree is the plan; providence (along with creation) is its execution in time.

decree: eternal plan of all that happens
providence: preserving and governing
providence carries out the decree

Providence, compatibilism and the problem of sin

The obvious question: if God ordains everything, is he responsible for evil, and are we still free? The Bible teaches both truths in the same sentences. Joseph tells his brothers, 'As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good' (Gen 50:20). One event, two intentions, two agents: the brothers acted wickedly and are guilty; God acted righteously and is praised. At Pentecost Peter says Jesus was 'delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God' and that 'you crucified and killed [him] by the hands of lawless men' (Acts 2:23; see also Acts 4:27-28).

The Reformed name for this is compatibilism: divine sovereignty and genuine human responsibility are compatible. Humans are free in the sense that matters for responsibility: they choose what they want, without external compulsion. God does not force people against their will; he ordains the whole story in which they freely act according to their natures.

God is also not the author of sin. He is the primary cause of all things, but he does not do evil, tempt anyone to evil (Jas 1:13), or approve of it (Hab 1:13). Theologians distinguish the primary cause (God, who upholds and directs all) and secondary causes (creatures, who really act and are really responsible). An author can write a villain without being villainous, though every analogy limps. Scripture itself shows God permitting, restraining, directing and overruling sin for good, while the sinner alone bears the guilt. WCF 3.1 holds the balance exactly: God ordains whatsoever comes to pass, 'yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures.' There is mystery here (Rom 11:33), but not contradiction. For the full apologetic treatment of evil and suffering, see Doctrines Under Fire, Lesson 4.

Which texts show that God's sovereignty and human responsibility operate in the very same event, and how do they show it?Show answer

In Genesis 50:20 Joseph tells his brothers, 'you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good': one event, two intentions, two agents. In Acts 2:23 Jesus was delivered up 'according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God', yet the people killed him 'by the hands of lawless men'. In both cases humans act wickedly and are guilty, while God acts righteously and is praised.

Gen 50:20
Acts 2:23 (and 4:27-28)
one event, two agents, two intentions
humans guilty, God righteous

What do 'primary cause' and 'secondary causes' mean, and how do they help explain that God is not the author of sin?Show answer

God is the primary cause who upholds and directs all things, while creatures are secondary causes who really act and are really responsible. God does not do evil, tempt anyone to it or approve of it (Jas 1:13; Hab 1:13); he permits, restrains, directs and overrules sin for good, while the sinner alone bears the guilt. WCF 3.1 says God ordains whatsoever comes to pass, yet without being the author of sin or doing violence to the creature's will; there is mystery here, but not contradiction.

primary cause: God upholds and directs
secondary causes: creatures really act
God does not do or approve evil
mystery, not contradiction

Common misunderstandings

Several distortions are worth naming, because you will meet them in church as much as outside it:

'Simplicity means God is simplistic or that his attributes are all the same word.' No: it means God is not composed of parts. We still rightly distinguish attributes in our understanding, because Scripture does.
'Immutable means static or inactive.' No: God is supremely active (John 5:17). He does not change because he is already fully alive and perfect, not because he is frozen.
'Impassible means unfeeling.' No: God's love and delight are fuller than ours, not less. Impassibility guards against a God who is at the mercy of creatures. Note: some evangelical theologians today modify or reject classical impassibility, and open theists (e.g. Clark Pinnock, Gregory Boyd) deny that God exhaustively knows the future. Confessional Reformed theology rejects open theism outright.
'Sovereignty means fatalism.' No: fatalism says what will be will be regardless of means. God ordains the means as well as the ends, so prayer, preaching and choices genuinely matter (Acts 27:22-31).
'Love is God's main attribute and the others are secondary.' No: Scripture says 'God is love' and 'God is light' (1 John 1:5) and 'a consuming fire' (Heb 12:29). Simplicity forbids ranking his attributes against each other.

How would you answer someone who says, 'If God has ordained everything, that's just fatalism, so prayer and choices don't matter'?Show answer

Fatalism says what will be will be regardless of the means. But God ordains the means as well as the ends, so prayer, preaching and choices genuinely matter. The section points to Acts 27:22-31 as an example of God ordaining both the outcome and the means.

fatalism ignores means
God ordains means and ends
prayer and choices matter
Acts 27:22-31

Why it matters, and where others depart

For worship, this doctrine is the fuel of praise: we adore God for who he is, not only for what he gives. For suffering, it is the deepest comfort: the God who ordains all things is good, so nothing is wasted (Rom 8:28). For assurance, it is an anchor: an unchanging God keeps his promises. For apologetics, it shows why only the God of the Bible can ground logic, morality and meaning: they need a personal, necessary, unchanging foundation.

Where others depart (briefly; the full treatment is in each module):

Secularism (Secular Society module): no God, so no ultimate ground for morality, reason or purpose.
Islam (Islam module): affirms one sovereign Creator and strong predestination (qadar), but as a unipersonal God (tawhid), which struggles to say God is eternally love before creation.
Jehovah's Witnesses (Jehovah's Witnesses module): one God, Jehovah, but deny the Trinity; some Watchtower literature teaches God chooses not to foreknow some things.
Latter-day Saints (Latter-day Saints module): deny the Creator-creature distinction; God the Father 'has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man's' (D&C 130:22) and was once a man (Joseph Smith, King Follett discourse, 1844).
Judaism (Judaism module): shares the high biblical doctrine of God's oneness and holiness, while rejecting the Trinity and incarnation.
Roman Catholicism (Roman Catholicism module): shares the classical doctrine of God (simplicity, immutability) almost entirely; the differences lie elsewhere.

Name the areas of life the section says this doctrine serves, and say in a sentence how it helps each.Show answer

For worship, it fuels praise, because we adore God for who he is and not only for what he gives. For suffering, it is deep comfort, because the God who ordains all things is good, so nothing is wasted (Rom 8:28). For assurance, an unchanging God keeps his promises; and for apologetics, only a personal, necessary, unchanging God can ground logic, morality and meaning.

worship: praise for who he is
suffering: nothing wasted
assurance: unchanging promises
apologetics: grounds logic and morality

How do Latter-day Saint and Muslim views of God each depart from the doctrine in this lesson?Show answer

Latter-day Saints deny the Creator-creature distinction, teaching that God the Father has a body of flesh and bones (D&C 130:22) and was once a man. Islam affirms one sovereign Creator and strong predestination, but as a unipersonal God, which struggles to say that God is eternally love before there was any creation to love.

LDS deny Creator-creature distinction
LDS: Father has a body, was once a man
Islam: unipersonal God
struggles with eternal love

Key texts

Exodus 3:14: 'I AM WHO I AM': God's name points to his self-existent, underived being, the root of aseity.
Acts 17:24-25: God made the world, is not served by human hands 'as though he needed anything', and gives life to all; aseity and the Creator-creature distinction in one sentence, preached to pagans.
Malachi 3:6: 'I the LORD do not change; therefore you... are not consumed': immutability as covenant comfort, not abstract philosophy.
Psalm 139:1-12: God's exhaustive knowledge and presence, given as personal comfort to the psalmist rather than cold data.
Isaiah 6:1-5: The thrice-holy God; holiness exposes sin and sets the stage for grace (the coal from the altar).
Exodus 34:6-7: God's own self-description holds mercy and justice together, a tension resolved only at the cross (Rom 3:26).
Ephesians 1:11: God 'works all things according to the counsel of his will': the decree covers all things, not only salvation.
Genesis 50:20: 'You meant evil against me, but God meant it for good': the classic text for compatibilism, two agents and two intentions in one event.
Acts 4:27-28: Herod, Pilate, Gentiles and Israel did 'whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place', yet were guilty; the cross is the ultimate example of providence over evil.

Objections and answers

Try answering each one yourself before you open the response.

“If God has decreed everything, including my choices, then I am not really free and cannot be blamed for anything.”Show a response

Scripture never treats sovereignty and responsibility as rivals. In Acts 2:23 the crucifixion is 'according to the definite plan' of God, yet Peter charges his hearers with guilt for it. Genesis 50:20 says the brothers meant evil and God meant good in the same act. The key is what we mean by 'free'. Biblically, you are responsible when you do what you want without being coerced. Joseph's brothers were not forced; they acted out of jealousy. God's decree does not drag anyone against their will; it ordains a world in which people act according to their own desires. Your choices are real, and they have real consequences, because God ordained them as the means through which his purposes come about. That is why Scripture commands, warns and pleads, while also declaring God's rule over all.

“If God is impassible and unchanging, he cannot really love me or respond to my prayers. He sounds like a cold machine.”Show a response

Impassibility does not mean God lacks love; it means his love cannot be diminished, shaken or manipulated. A God who could be emotionally overwhelmed by creatures would be less secure for you, not more. His love is not a fluctuating mood but an eternal, active commitment (Jer 31:3), already infinitely full within the Trinity before you existed (John 17:24). As for prayer, God has ordained prayer as one of the means through which he accomplishes his will (Jas 4:2, 'you do not have, because you do not ask'). Your prayer does not change his eternal plan; it is part of it. When Scripture says God relented (e.g. Jonah 3:10), it describes his consistent character responding in time to repentance, exactly as he promised he would (Jer 18:7-8).

“If God ordains all things, he must be the author of sin, which makes him evil.”Show a response

Scripture affirms both that God ordains all things (Eph 1:11) and that God tempts no one and does no wrong (Jas 1:13; Deut 32:4). Theologians distinguish primary and secondary causes: God is the ultimate cause of the whole story, but creatures are the proximate, responsible doers of their actions, and the moral quality of an act lies in the intention of the one who does it. At the cross, the worst sin ever committed was ordained by God (Acts 4:28), yet God's purpose was the salvation of sinners, while Judas' purpose was greed. Same event, opposite intentions. WCF 3.1 states the balance: God ordains whatsoever comes to pass, yet he is not the author of sin and no violence is done to the creature's will. We cannot fully trace how, but the alternative, a God who does not rule over evil, offers no hope that evil will ever be defeated.

“How can God be 'simple' and yet have all these different attributes? Isn't that a contradiction?”Show a response

Simplicity does not deny that God has many perfections; it denies that he is built out of them like a machine out of components. The many attributes are our true but limited ways of grasping one infinite reality. Think of white light passing through a prism: one light, many colours, each really there, none a separate 'part' of the light. The analogy is imperfect, but it helps. Scripture supports simplicity by saying God is love (1 John 4:8), is light (1 John 1:5), and is life (John 5:26), not merely that he has these things. This doctrine protects us from imagining God's attributes in conflict, as if his love wanted to forgive but his justice held him back. In the cross, love and justice act as one.

“If God doesn't need anything, why did he bother creating us? Was he lonely, or does he just want attention?”Show a response

That is a good question, and the answer is better than either option. God was never lonely: within the Trinity the Father has loved the Son 'before the foundation of the world' (John 17:24), so love and fellowship are eternal in God. Nor does he need our praise; Paul says God is not 'served by human hands, as though he needed anything' (Acts 17:25). So creation was not God filling a gap in himself. It was the free overflow of a fullness he already had, the way a fountain overflows because it is full, not because it is empty. That changes how you see yourself. You were not made to meet God's needs, but to share in his goodness. Worship, then, is not a payment to a needy deity but the joy of creatures who are finally seeing what is most worth seeing.

“I could never worship a God of wrath. A truly loving God would never be angry with anyone.”Show a response

I understand why 'wrath' sounds ugly; we picture a temper out of control. But Scripture does not describe that. God's wrath is not a mood swing; it is the settled opposition of his holiness to evil (Rom 1:18). Think about it from your own heart: when you hear of a child abused or a people massacred, you feel anger, and you would think less of someone who felt nothing. A God who did not hate evil would not be good. Because God is simple, not made of rival parts, his justice is always loving and his love is always holy. Exodus 34:6-7 holds both together: 'merciful and gracious... abounding in steadfast love', yet one who 'will by no means clear the guilty'. The good news is how he resolves that tension: at the cross, where he is both just and the justifier of those who believe (Rom 3:26).

Written task

A friend in your small group says: 'I believe God is in control, but surely he just lets things happen. If he planned evil, he would be evil.' In 300-400 words, write a pastoral reply explaining the Reformed doctrine of God's decree and providence. Use at least four texts and explain what each shows, define compatibilism, explain why God is not the author of sin, and show why this doctrine is comforting rather than frightening.

Hand this in to Mr Scott. He will look for:

States the doctrine of the decree accurately (God ordains whatsoever comes to pass) without collapsing it into mere permission or fatalism.
Uses at least four texts (e.g. Eph 1:11, Gen 50:20, Acts 2:23 or 4:27-28, Jas 1:13, Rom 8:28) and explains what each contributes.
Defines compatibilism and distinguishes God's intention from the sinner's intention in the same event.
Explains clearly why God is not the author of sin (primary and secondary causes, or equivalent).
Applies the doctrine pastorally (comfort in suffering, prayer, assurance) in a warm tone.